It isn't naive to state that Open's current rules are to blame for the existence of gankers, nor is it naive to state that if PvP was restricted to certain areas and properly rewarded, and if this game had a decent crime and punishment system, that these things would alleviate much of the problem.
Seriously, what's the point in open play?
- Thread starter DjVortex
- Start date
- Status
And my point is that playing by rules is one thing, having some common courtesy is another. Some people might not like your acts, even if they are within rules. And may react accordingly. By not wanting to associate with you.
More like how it is, there really are not laws forcing one to be nice to people
So are our brave PVP'ers kind of bots that have NO CHOICE over how they act? Why should I want associate with such players? What it gives me?
Typically restricting PVP to certain areas has also met noisy opposition. Are you saying Open should basically be ditched as it is? That will not raise your stocks at PVP circles...
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Gankers will exist as long as players are free to shoot at (and damage) CMDRs that they instance with. I very much doubt that PvP would be geographically restricted this late in the game's development - and proposals to change C&P that would specifically deal with PvP attacks often get shot down by the pro-PvP, with claims that it's not reasonable to treat attacks on players and on NPCs differently.
Noting that, in the end, the result is the same - "would alleviate much of the problem" is equivalent to "spilling over would not stop"....
The Game wasn't designed with a PvE mode in mind though. Quite rightly too imo, there will always be ways to grief other players (abusing the block list for example), an Open PvE mode is a hopeless ideal not a practical solution.
Yes, and those people end up blocking people and hiding from Open in other modes when they shouldn't have to, because ED should have a decent crime and punishment system and something rewarding to occupy the PvPers.
None at all.
Of course they have choice, and you don't get to make it for them, just like how they can't prevent you from blocking them or going to Solo. None of that makes Open any less broken.
I don't PvP, nor do I care about their circles.
Open-PVE and blockin usual trolls combo would practically work. There are always some edge cases.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
The original design pitch included potential for multiple open "groups" (i.e. modes, "Open" was referred to the "All Group" at that time) with different rules to accommodate different play-styles - although that original design did not make it through development, of course.
Deciat Gankers so often ment ioned in threads like these are edge cases
How often do you need to go to Deciat?
Crumbs yes. I remember a homemade text-only adventure game which some of us managed to make multiplayer on a mainframe in the 80s. There were "talk" and "fight" options. Almost immediately some people found that if two of them on two terminals simultaneously sent "talk" and "fight" to a third player, that player would be killed before he could get out of the "talk" screen. It's how some people are.
FD have done absolutely nothing about the whole problem apart from giving us a bit of control over instancing.
I think you just replying to what you think people write & not what they actually wrote. No Open PvE, it's an unworkable hopeless ideal fraught with problems (not least of which is one close to your own heart, who polices it?).
It's simply not a viable proposal. Gitting Gud otoh....
Besides it is pretty easy to test that spillover stuff (if you have credits and engineered components available). Build something that is either pretty pvp proof by being rather hard to stop&destroy, or actually capable of fighting back. Visit some known gank hotspots. Suddenly it is peacefull sunday stroll. Nobody interdicts you. Now build some noobboat, or paper trader, and do same experiment again. Now you meet those oh so brave übercombat types....Which makes one wonder, are they really that good in PVP after all?
I have tested it, occasionally do to populate my blocklist
I have tested it, occasionally do to populate my blocklist
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
Not at all - unless different rules for different playstyles in some way clearly precludes an Open PvE mode? I acknowledge that DBOBE ruled it out in the Engineers launch stream - but that was years after the design was published, i.e. the game was, at one point, designed to accommodate different rulesets in different Open modes.
Other games manage it successfully.
.... and not everyone finds those who one would need to "git gud" to play among to actually be fun to play with - so why waste the time to, at best, not have more time than the unwanted interctions took to avoid wasted later?
Last edited:
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
... better yet, use an unknown altCMDR for the second test - that way the usual suspects won't suspect that the test is in progress.Besides it is pretty easy to test that spillover stuff (if you have credits and engineered components available). Build something that is either pretty pvp proof by being rather hard to stop&destroy, or actually capable of fighting back. Visit some known gank hotspots. Suddenly it is peacefull sunday stroll. Nobody interdicts you. Now build some noobboat, or paper trader, and do same experiment again. Now you meet those oh so brave übercombat types....Which makes one wonder, are they really that good in PVP after all?
I have tested it, occasionally do to populate my blocklist
Involves doing a lot of stuff one might not like doing at all. Just to get those parts of game one likes doing.
Not ones that were designed specifically to be PvP enabled in all multiplayer modes.
An open PvE mode is unworkable for lots of reasons, ones you are happy to overlook because you consider those to be edge cases, yet you argue that the game we currently have is wanting because of different edge cases. Your argyuments are moot.
otoh the solid general advice regularly given in threads like these (with varying degrees of diplomacy) to up your game & use the tools already in the game just works. No Dev work required, no special mode to remember to select, just play the game, take on whatever challenges you are comfortable with and others can do the same. No edge cases, just solutions. Having trouble? Learn (from others or by yourself) how to get past that hurdle. Learning is fun
Don't do it then, your choice.
Robert Maynard
Volunteer Moderator
In which case others need to learn to accept that no-one needs to play with them while affecting mode shared game features, and stop complaining about that too.Not ones that were designed specifically to be PvP enabled in all multiplayer modes.
An open PvE mode is unworkable for lots of reasons, ones you are happy to overlook because you consider those to be edge cases, yet you argue that the game we currently have is wanting because of different edge cases. Your argyuments are moot.
otoh the solid general advice regularly given in threads like these (with varying degrees of diplomacy) to up your game & use the tools already in the game just works. No Dev work required, no special mode to remember to select, just play the game, take on whatever challenges you are comfortable with and others can do the same. No edge cases, just solutions. Having trouble? Learn (from others or by yourself) how to get past that hurdle. Learning is fun
NPC's are part of environment, and bots without free will. Should YOU act like a bot?"Thats the ship I'm looking for, the one with the big haul..."
Edit, though it would be nice to see if they used some consideration, like "I'm flying unengineered Python, should I REALLY take that G5 Cutter, it will likely obliterate me fast. Without losing single ring of shields..."
- Status